get_work_references

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided; description only states the action without disclosing behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, or error handling (e.g., invalid ID). Minimal transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two concise sentences with the action front-loaded; no unnecessary words or repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Simple tool with one parameter; description covers purpose and use case but lacks information about return format or pagination. Could be more complete given the absence of output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% for the single parameter, so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves works referenced by a given work, with a specific use case for backward citation analysis. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_work_citations or get_related_works.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for backward citation analysis but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools for forward citations or related works.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.